37 research outputs found

    Perceived risk of infection and death from COVID-19 among community members of low- and middle-income countries: A cross-sectional study [version 1; peer review: awaiting peer review]

    Get PDF
    Background: Risk perceptions of coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) are considered important as they impact community health behaviors. The aim of this study was to determine the perceived risk of infection and death due to COVID-19 and to assess the factors associated with such risk perceptions among community members in low- and middle-income countries (LMICs) in Africa, Asia, and South America. Methods: An online cross-sectional study was conducted in 10 LMICs in Africa, Asia, and South America from February to May 2021. A questionnaire was utilized to assess the perceived risk of infection and death from COVID-19 and its plausible determinants. A logistic regression model was used to identify the factors associated with such risk perceptions. Results: A total of 1,646 responses were included in the analysis of the perceived risk of becoming infected and dying from COVID-19. Our data suggested that 36.4% of participants had a high perceived risk of COVID-19 infection, while only 22.4% had a perceived risk of dying from COVID-19. Being a woman, working in healthcare-related sectors, contracting pulmonary disease, knowing people in the immediate social environment who are or have been infected with COVID-19, as well as seeing or reading about individuals infected with COVID-19 on social media or TV were all associated with a higher perceived risk of becoming infected with COVID-19. In addition, being a woman, elderly, having heart disease and pulmonary disease, knowing people in the immediate social environment who are or have been infected with COVID-19, and seeing or reading about individuals infected with COVID-19 on social media or TV had a higher perceived risk of dying from COVID-19. Conclusions: The perceived risk of infection and death due to COVID-19 are relatively low among respondents; this suggests the need to conduct health campaigns to disseminate knowledge and information on the ongoing pandemic

    Anxiety and its risk factors among non-Japanese residents living in Japan undergoing COVID-19 situation: A cross-sectional survey

    Get PDF
    Introduction In the context of collective efforts taken in Japan to control the spread of COVID-19, the state of emergency and social distancing have caused a negative impact on the mental health of all residents, including foreign communities in Japan. This study aimed to evaluate the level of anxiety and its associated factors among non-Japanese residents residing in Japan during the COVID-19 pandemic. Methods A web-based survey in 13 languages was conducted among non-Japanese residents living in Japan during the COVID-19 situation. The State-Trait Anxiety Inventory assessed the level of anxiety–State (STAI-S) scores prorated from its six-item version. The multivariable logistic regression using the Akaike Information Criterion (AIC) method was performed to identify the associated factors of anxiety among participants. Results From January to March 2021, we collected 392 responses. A total of 357 valid responses were analyzed. 54.6% of participants suffered from clinically significant anxiety (CSA). In multivariable logistic model analysis, the CSA status or the high level of anxiety was associated with three factors, including having troubles/difficulties in learning or working, decreased sleep duration, and decreased overall physical health (p<0.05). Conclusion Our study suggests several possible risk factors of anxiety among non-Japanese residents living in Japan undergoing the COVID-19 pandemic, including the troubles or difficulties in learning or working, the decrease in sleep duration, and the decrease in overall physical health.Revisión por pare

    Elective Cancer Surgery in COVID-19-Free Surgical Pathways During the SARS-CoV-2 Pandemic: An International, Multicenter, Comparative Cohort Study.

    Get PDF
    PURPOSE: As cancer surgery restarts after the first COVID-19 wave, health care providers urgently require data to determine where elective surgery is best performed. This study aimed to determine whether COVID-19-free surgical pathways were associated with lower postoperative pulmonary complication rates compared with hospitals with no defined pathway. PATIENTS AND METHODS: This international, multicenter cohort study included patients who underwent elective surgery for 10 solid cancer types without preoperative suspicion of SARS-CoV-2. Participating hospitals included patients from local emergence of SARS-CoV-2 until April 19, 2020. At the time of surgery, hospitals were defined as having a COVID-19-free surgical pathway (complete segregation of the operating theater, critical care, and inpatient ward areas) or no defined pathway (incomplete or no segregation, areas shared with patients with COVID-19). The primary outcome was 30-day postoperative pulmonary complications (pneumonia, acute respiratory distress syndrome, unexpected ventilation). RESULTS: Of 9,171 patients from 447 hospitals in 55 countries, 2,481 were operated on in COVID-19-free surgical pathways. Patients who underwent surgery within COVID-19-free surgical pathways were younger with fewer comorbidities than those in hospitals with no defined pathway but with similar proportions of major surgery. After adjustment, pulmonary complication rates were lower with COVID-19-free surgical pathways (2.2% v 4.9%; adjusted odds ratio [aOR], 0.62; 95% CI, 0.44 to 0.86). This was consistent in sensitivity analyses for low-risk patients (American Society of Anesthesiologists grade 1/2), propensity score-matched models, and patients with negative SARS-CoV-2 preoperative tests. The postoperative SARS-CoV-2 infection rate was also lower in COVID-19-free surgical pathways (2.1% v 3.6%; aOR, 0.53; 95% CI, 0.36 to 0.76). CONCLUSION: Within available resources, dedicated COVID-19-free surgical pathways should be established to provide safe elective cancer surgery during current and before future SARS-CoV-2 outbreaks

    Elective cancer surgery in COVID-19-free surgical pathways during the SARS-CoV-2 pandemic: An international, multicenter, comparative cohort study

    Get PDF
    PURPOSE As cancer surgery restarts after the first COVID-19 wave, health care providers urgently require data to determine where elective surgery is best performed. This study aimed to determine whether COVID-19–free surgical pathways were associated with lower postoperative pulmonary complication rates compared with hospitals with no defined pathway. PATIENTS AND METHODS This international, multicenter cohort study included patients who underwent elective surgery for 10 solid cancer types without preoperative suspicion of SARS-CoV-2. Participating hospitals included patients from local emergence of SARS-CoV-2 until April 19, 2020. At the time of surgery, hospitals were defined as having a COVID-19–free surgical pathway (complete segregation of the operating theater, critical care, and inpatient ward areas) or no defined pathway (incomplete or no segregation, areas shared with patients with COVID-19). The primary outcome was 30-day postoperative pulmonary complications (pneumonia, acute respiratory distress syndrome, unexpected ventilation). RESULTS Of 9,171 patients from 447 hospitals in 55 countries, 2,481 were operated on in COVID-19–free surgical pathways. Patients who underwent surgery within COVID-19–free surgical pathways were younger with fewer comorbidities than those in hospitals with no defined pathway but with similar proportions of major surgery. After adjustment, pulmonary complication rates were lower with COVID-19–free surgical pathways (2.2% v 4.9%; adjusted odds ratio [aOR], 0.62; 95% CI, 0.44 to 0.86). This was consistent in sensitivity analyses for low-risk patients (American Society of Anesthesiologists grade 1/2), propensity score–matched models, and patients with negative SARS-CoV-2 preoperative tests. The postoperative SARS-CoV-2 infection rate was also lower in COVID-19–free surgical pathways (2.1% v 3.6%; aOR, 0.53; 95% CI, 0.36 to 0.76). CONCLUSION Within available resources, dedicated COVID-19–free surgical pathways should be established to provide safe elective cancer surgery during current and before future SARS-CoV-2 outbreaks

    The impact of immediate breast reconstruction on the time to delivery of adjuvant therapy: the iBRA-2 study

    Get PDF
    Background: Immediate breast reconstruction (IBR) is routinely offered to improve quality-of-life for women requiring mastectomy, but there are concerns that more complex surgery may delay adjuvant oncological treatments and compromise long-term outcomes. High-quality evidence is lacking. The iBRA-2 study aimed to investigate the impact of IBR on time to adjuvant therapy. Methods: Consecutive women undergoing mastectomy ± IBR for breast cancer July–December, 2016 were included. Patient demographics, operative, oncological and complication data were collected. Time from last definitive cancer surgery to first adjuvant treatment for patients undergoing mastectomy ± IBR were compared and risk factors associated with delays explored. Results: A total of 2540 patients were recruited from 76 centres; 1008 (39.7%) underwent IBR (implant-only [n = 675, 26.6%]; pedicled flaps [n = 105,4.1%] and free-flaps [n = 228, 8.9%]). Complications requiring re-admission or re-operation were significantly more common in patients undergoing IBR than those receiving mastectomy. Adjuvant chemotherapy or radiotherapy was required by 1235 (48.6%) patients. No clinically significant differences were seen in time to adjuvant therapy between patient groups but major complications irrespective of surgery received were significantly associated with treatment delays. Conclusions: IBR does not result in clinically significant delays to adjuvant therapy, but post-operative complications are associated with treatment delays. Strategies to minimise complications, including careful patient selection, are required to improve outcomes for patients

    Impact of opioid-free analgesia on pain severity and patient satisfaction after discharge from surgery: multispecialty, prospective cohort study in 25 countries

    Get PDF
    Background: Balancing opioid stewardship and the need for adequate analgesia following discharge after surgery is challenging. This study aimed to compare the outcomes for patients discharged with opioid versus opioid-free analgesia after common surgical procedures.Methods: This international, multicentre, prospective cohort study collected data from patients undergoing common acute and elective general surgical, urological, gynaecological, and orthopaedic procedures. The primary outcomes were patient-reported time in severe pain measured on a numerical analogue scale from 0 to 100% and patient-reported satisfaction with pain relief during the first week following discharge. Data were collected by in-hospital chart review and patient telephone interview 1 week after discharge.Results: The study recruited 4273 patients from 144 centres in 25 countries; 1311 patients (30.7%) were prescribed opioid analgesia at discharge. Patients reported being in severe pain for 10 (i.q.r. 1-30)% of the first week after discharge and rated satisfaction with analgesia as 90 (i.q.r. 80-100) of 100. After adjustment for confounders, opioid analgesia on discharge was independently associated with increased pain severity (risk ratio 1.52, 95% c.i. 1.31 to 1.76; P &lt; 0.001) and re-presentation to healthcare providers owing to side-effects of medication (OR 2.38, 95% c.i. 1.36 to 4.17; P = 0.004), but not with satisfaction with analgesia (beta coefficient 0.92, 95% c.i. -1.52 to 3.36; P = 0.468) compared with opioid-free analgesia. Although opioid prescribing varied greatly between high-income and low- and middle-income countries, patient-reported outcomes did not.Conclusion: Opioid analgesia prescription on surgical discharge is associated with a higher risk of re-presentation owing to side-effects of medication and increased patient-reported pain, but not with changes in patient-reported satisfaction. Opioid-free discharge analgesia should be adopted routinely

    Breast cancer management pathways during the COVID-19 pandemic: outcomes from the UK ‘Alert Level 4’ phase of the B-MaP-C study

    Get PDF
    Abstract: Background: The B-MaP-C study aimed to determine alterations to breast cancer (BC) management during the peak transmission period of the UK COVID-19 pandemic and the potential impact of these treatment decisions. Methods: This was a national cohort study of patients with early BC undergoing multidisciplinary team (MDT)-guided treatment recommendations during the pandemic, designated ‘standard’ or ‘COVID-altered’, in the preoperative, operative and post-operative setting. Findings: Of 3776 patients (from 64 UK units) in the study, 2246 (59%) had ‘COVID-altered’ management. ‘Bridging’ endocrine therapy was used (n = 951) where theatre capacity was reduced. There was increasing access to COVID-19 low-risk theatres during the study period (59%). In line with national guidance, immediate breast reconstruction was avoided (n = 299). Where adjuvant chemotherapy was omitted (n = 81), the median benefit was only 3% (IQR 2–9%) using ‘NHS Predict’. There was the rapid adoption of new evidence-based hypofractionated radiotherapy (n = 781, from 46 units). Only 14 patients (1%) tested positive for SARS-CoV-2 during their treatment journey. Conclusions: The majority of ‘COVID-altered’ management decisions were largely in line with pre-COVID evidence-based guidelines, implying that breast cancer survival outcomes are unlikely to be negatively impacted by the pandemic. However, in this study, the potential impact of delays to BC presentation or diagnosis remains unknown

    A systematic review of symptomatic small bowel lipomas of the jejunum and ileum

    Get PDF
    Introduction Small bowel lipomas are rarely encountered benign adipose growths found within the small intestine wall or mesentery. Limited up-to-date evidence exists regarding such lipomas. We aim to aid clinical decision-making and improve patient outcomes through this comprehensive review. Methodology The terms ‘small bowel,’ ‘small intestine,’ ‘jejunum’ and ‘ileum’ were combined with ‘lipoma.’ EMBASE, Medline and PubMed database searches were performed. All papers published in English from 01/01/2000-31/12/2019 were included. Simple statistical analysis (t-test, Anova) was performed. Results 142 papers yielded 147 cases (adults = 138, pediatric = 9). Male = 88, female = 59 (average age = 49.9 years). Presenting symptoms: abdominal pain = 68.7%; nausea/vomiting = 35.3%, hematochezia/GI bleeding = 33.3%; anaemia = 10.9%; abdominal distension = 12.2%; constipation = 8.9%; weight loss = 7.5%. Mean preceding symptom length = 58.1 days (symptoms >1 year excluded (n = 9)). Diagnostic imaging utilised: abdominal X-Ray = 33.3%; endoscopy = 46.3%; CT = 78.2%; ultrasound = 23.8%. 124/137 (90.5%) required definitive surgical management (laparotomy = 89, laparoscopcic = 35). 9 patients were successfully managed endoscopically. Lipoma location: ileum = 59.9%, jejunum = 32%, mesentery = 4.8%. Maximal recorded lipoma size ranged 1.2–22 cm. Mean maximum lipoma diameter and management strategy comparison: laparotomy 5.6 cm, laparoscopic = 4.4 cm, endoscopic = 3.7 cm, conservative = 4.5 cm. One-way Anova test, p value = 0.21. Average length of stay (LOS) was 7.4 days (range = 2–30). T-test p value = 0.13 when comparing management modalities and LOS. 4 complications, 0 mortality. Conclusions Important previously undocumented points are illustrated; a clearer symptom profile, diagnostic investigations utilised, size and site of lipomas, types and effectiveness of management modalities, associated morbidity and mortality. Open surgery remains the primary management. No statistically significant difference in LOS and lipoma size is demonstrated between management strategies. Endoscopic and laparoscopic techniques may reduce utilising invasive surgery in the future as skillset and availability improve

    A De Garengeot Hernia masquerading as a strangulated femoral hernia

    Get PDF
    INTRODUCTION: De Garengeot hernia is a rare occurrence whereby an appendix is found in a femoral hernia sac. It is rarer still to find an acutely inflamed appendix manifesting itself as a strangulated femoral hernia. This case is important to report as it highlights the diagnostic difficulty this particular condition presents to an emergency surgeon. PRESENTATION OF CASE: We report the case of an 86 year old female who was found to have a De Garengeot hernia containing a necrotic appendix. A retrograde appendicectomy was performed to prevent peritoneal contamination. The hernia defect was repaired using a standard repair with non-absorbable suture. DISCUSSION: De Garengeot's hernia is a rare occurrence, is often unexpected and tends to be diagnosed intra-operatively. Pre-operative diagnosis remains difficult and it will often masquerade as a strangulated femoral hernia. In stable patients, where there is a diagnostic uncertainty CT scanning is a useful adjunct and may allow a laparoscopic approach to be undertaken in the absence of appendicitis. CONCLUSION: A De Garengeot's hernia should be considered as a differential diagnosis in patients presenting with clinical signs of a strangulated femoral hernia. It is often an incidental finding during an emergency operation. Although mesh repairs in the presence of appendicitis have been reported, the safest approach remains a primary suture repair
    corecore